Events & Promotions
|
|
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.
Customized
for You
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Apr 2512:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
At one point, she believed GMAT wasn’t for her. After scoring 595, self-doubt crept in and she questioned her potential. But instead of quitting, she made the right strategic changes. The result? A remarkable comeback to 695. Check out how Saakshi did it.
Apr 2601:30 AM EDT
-02:30 AM EDT
Learn how Keshav, a Chartered Accountant, scored an impressive 705 on GMAT in just 30 days with GMATWhiz's expert guidance. In this video, he shares preparation tips and strategies that worked for him, including the mock, time management, and more.
Apr 2610:00 AM EDT
-11:00 AM EDT
The Target Test Prep course represents a quantum leap forward in GMAT preparation, a radical reinterpretation of the way that students should study. Try before you buy with a 5-day, full-access trial of the course for FREE!
Apr 2711:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
May 0111:00 AM PDT
-12:00 PM PDT
Free- full-length test + 15 concept videos + 150+ short videos + study plan!
08 Sep 2021, 20:55
Kudos
Bookmarks
Question - The following appeared in a memorandum issued by a large city’s council on the arts:
“In a recent citywide poll, 15 percent more residents said that they watch television programs about the visual arts than was the case in a poll conducted five years ago. During these past five years, the number of people visiting our city’s art museums has increased by a similar percentage. Since the corporate funding that supports public television, where most of the visual arts programs appear, is now being threatened with severe cuts, we can expect that attendance at our city’s art museums will also start to decrease. Thus some of the city’s funds for supporting the arts should be reallocated to public television.”
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your Discussion be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For Example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion
My AWA essay :
The argument claims that 15% more residents watch visual art programs on the television than five years ago and in these past 5 years the number of visitors in the art museums have increased as well. Further, due to lack of corporate funding for supporting television the number of visitors in the art museums are likely to decrease. Hence, the city’s funds for Art museums must be reallocated to to support the Television. This plan is likely to fail due to the flaws in the reasoning and logic.
First, the argument readily assumes that there is a strong link between residents watching visual art programs and the number of people visiting the art museums. This statement is logically flawed as there is no evidence that showcases the link between them. The argument could have been clearer if there is some quantifiable data that represents the whole population of the city showcasing the link between watching visual art programs and visiting the museums. For example – if the data revealed that the residents have developed an interest in the world of art by watching visual art programs making them actually visit the museums then the argument would presented some evidence. Hence, this assumption is unconvincing and lacks evidence.
Second, the memorandum presumes that the increase in the footfall of the art museums only depends on the residents watching Visual Arts programs on the television. This is again a very weak and unsupported claim. While, watching visual art programs can be influential to increase the footfall it is not the only factor that explains the increase in the number of people. To illustrate, the tourism in that city might have been promoted in the past 5 years and many tourists must have visited the art museums showing the rise in the number of people visiting the museums. This assumption is questionable as there is not much information available to find the correlation between visual arts programs and increase in the number of people at the art museums.
Lastly, the author concludes that the funds for the art museums must be reallocated to television in order to expect rise in number of people visiting museums. This conclusion is extremely flawed as there is no gurantee that the funding of public television will enhance footfall. TO further explain, if the funds have been allocated there is no assurance that the corporate television will still telecast visual art programs, What if the visual art programs have been scrapped from being telecasted on the television? Without convincing answers to these questions and illustrations, we can state that the arguments conclusion lacks substantive evidence.
In conclusion, the whole argument is flawed for the above-mentioned reasons and is therefore unconvincing. It could be strengthened if the author clearly mentioned all the relevant information to pose as evidence and support the conclusion made. Without this information, the argument remains open to debate.
“In a recent citywide poll, 15 percent more residents said that they watch television programs about the visual arts than was the case in a poll conducted five years ago. During these past five years, the number of people visiting our city’s art museums has increased by a similar percentage. Since the corporate funding that supports public television, where most of the visual arts programs appear, is now being threatened with severe cuts, we can expect that attendance at our city’s art museums will also start to decrease. Thus some of the city’s funds for supporting the arts should be reallocated to public television.”
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your Discussion be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For Example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion
My AWA essay :
The argument claims that 15% more residents watch visual art programs on the television than five years ago and in these past 5 years the number of visitors in the art museums have increased as well. Further, due to lack of corporate funding for supporting television the number of visitors in the art museums are likely to decrease. Hence, the city’s funds for Art museums must be reallocated to to support the Television. This plan is likely to fail due to the flaws in the reasoning and logic.
First, the argument readily assumes that there is a strong link between residents watching visual art programs and the number of people visiting the art museums. This statement is logically flawed as there is no evidence that showcases the link between them. The argument could have been clearer if there is some quantifiable data that represents the whole population of the city showcasing the link between watching visual art programs and visiting the museums. For example – if the data revealed that the residents have developed an interest in the world of art by watching visual art programs making them actually visit the museums then the argument would presented some evidence. Hence, this assumption is unconvincing and lacks evidence.
Second, the memorandum presumes that the increase in the footfall of the art museums only depends on the residents watching Visual Arts programs on the television. This is again a very weak and unsupported claim. While, watching visual art programs can be influential to increase the footfall it is not the only factor that explains the increase in the number of people. To illustrate, the tourism in that city might have been promoted in the past 5 years and many tourists must have visited the art museums showing the rise in the number of people visiting the museums. This assumption is questionable as there is not much information available to find the correlation between visual arts programs and increase in the number of people at the art museums.
Lastly, the author concludes that the funds for the art museums must be reallocated to television in order to expect rise in number of people visiting museums. This conclusion is extremely flawed as there is no gurantee that the funding of public television will enhance footfall. TO further explain, if the funds have been allocated there is no assurance that the corporate television will still telecast visual art programs, What if the visual art programs have been scrapped from being telecasted on the television? Without convincing answers to these questions and illustrations, we can state that the arguments conclusion lacks substantive evidence.
In conclusion, the whole argument is flawed for the above-mentioned reasons and is therefore unconvincing. It could be strengthened if the author clearly mentioned all the relevant information to pose as evidence and support the conclusion made. Without this information, the argument remains open to debate.
09 Sep 2021, 04:08
Kudos
Bookmarks
AWA Score: 5 out of 6!
I have used a GMATAWA auto-grader to evaluate your essay.
Coherence and connectivity: 4.5/5
This rating corresponds to the flow of ideas and expressions from one paragraph to another. The effective use of connectives and coherence of assertive language in arguing for/against the argument is analyzed. This is deemed as one of the most important parameters.
Paragraph structure and formation: 3/5
The structure and division of the attempt into appropriate paragraphs are evaluated. To score well on this parameter, it is important to organize the attempt into paragraphs. Preferable to follow the convention of leaving a line blank at the end of each paragraph, to make the software aware of the structure of the essay.
Vocabulary and word expression: 4/5
This parameter rates the submitted essay on the range of relevant vocabulary possessed by the candidate basis the word and expression usage. There are no extra- points for bombastic word usage. Simple is the best form of suave!
I have used a GMATAWA auto-grader to evaluate your essay.
Coherence and connectivity: 4.5/5
This rating corresponds to the flow of ideas and expressions from one paragraph to another. The effective use of connectives and coherence of assertive language in arguing for/against the argument is analyzed. This is deemed as one of the most important parameters.
Paragraph structure and formation: 3/5
The structure and division of the attempt into appropriate paragraphs are evaluated. To score well on this parameter, it is important to organize the attempt into paragraphs. Preferable to follow the convention of leaving a line blank at the end of each paragraph, to make the software aware of the structure of the essay.
Vocabulary and word expression: 4/5
This parameter rates the submitted essay on the range of relevant vocabulary possessed by the candidate basis the word and expression usage. There are no extra- points for bombastic word usage. Simple is the best form of suave!
I have edited the topic name as per AWA forum rules, I suggest you to read the AWA rule before your next post in the forum. Follow the link below to read the rules.
https://gmatclub.com/forum/awa-forum-ru ... 64141.html
Good Luck
yashaancawasji
16 Oct 2023, 09:11
Kudos
Bookmarks
Please EXPERT team could you rate my herebelow essay?
-------------------------------------------------
The argument claims that since during the same time frame, the increase in the rate of residents visiting the city art museums is the same as that in the number of residents watching television, funding cuts for television’s programs where most of visual arts appear will lead to a decrease in the attendance of city’ art museums, hence, some funding for supporting arts should be reallocated to public television. Stated in that way, the argument omits several important elements that must be addressed to substantiate the argument. The argument relies on an unfounded causal relationship for which no fact-based evidence has been provided. Therefore, the argument is rather weak, unconvincing, and has several flaws.
First the argument assumes that since the increase in the rate of television watchers and in the rate of city art museums visits occur at the same time, the two events are casually related. One cannot deny the fact that in some case the simultaneous occurrence of two events may signal a casual relationship, but in this case the author assumption may not hold true because each event can have its own cause. For instance, imagine that during the same time frame, the number of tourists visiting the city increased by 15% and that the number of persons per house increased by more than 15%. In that case, the increase in the rate of arts museum visitors may be attributed to the number of tourists and the increase of resident television watcher to the increase in the number of persons per house. Additionally, the argument ruled out the fact that both events can have the same cause. For example, it may be the case that city residents may have become interested in arts and due to the high cost of museum ticket entry, some residents decided to experience art through television programs and the others through museum visits. Clearly, interest in art triggered both television program attendance and museum arts visits. Moreover, behind the author assertion there is an unstated assumption that reduction of funding for television art program will have a negative impact on the number of city museums visitors. In reality, it could be that after a certain number of television visual art programs has been released, the subsequent have no impact on the viewers and are therefore unnecessary. In that case adding or reducing funding will not impact the number city art museum visitor. To end, the author argument has no legs to stand on because if the total population of the country has decreased over the last five year while both the number of residents watching visual art program and the number of residents visiting the art museum remain unchanged, there is no surprise to see the increase of both the rate of resident watching art program and the rate of visitors to museum. Yet the author has not ruled out this eventuality.
Second the argument conclusion that fund dedicated to city art should be allocated to public television is fallacious. On the one hand, by assigning the funds dedicated to art to public television, one cannot guarantee that those will be used to finance art programs. On the other hand, even if some of those funds will be used for visual art program, there is no guarantee that these programs would have a greater impact than other non-television programs used to promote art, such as schools and homes campaigns to sensitize population about importance of art or subsidy for museums entry tickets
In summary, because the argument leaves out several key issues, it is neither sound nor persuasive, and therefore unconvincing. It would have been more thorough or convincing if the author closed the gap discussed above. In order to assess the merits of a certain situation, it is essential to have a full knowledge of all contributing factors.
-------------------------------------------------
The argument claims that since during the same time frame, the increase in the rate of residents visiting the city art museums is the same as that in the number of residents watching television, funding cuts for television’s programs where most of visual arts appear will lead to a decrease in the attendance of city’ art museums, hence, some funding for supporting arts should be reallocated to public television. Stated in that way, the argument omits several important elements that must be addressed to substantiate the argument. The argument relies on an unfounded causal relationship for which no fact-based evidence has been provided. Therefore, the argument is rather weak, unconvincing, and has several flaws.
First the argument assumes that since the increase in the rate of television watchers and in the rate of city art museums visits occur at the same time, the two events are casually related. One cannot deny the fact that in some case the simultaneous occurrence of two events may signal a casual relationship, but in this case the author assumption may not hold true because each event can have its own cause. For instance, imagine that during the same time frame, the number of tourists visiting the city increased by 15% and that the number of persons per house increased by more than 15%. In that case, the increase in the rate of arts museum visitors may be attributed to the number of tourists and the increase of resident television watcher to the increase in the number of persons per house. Additionally, the argument ruled out the fact that both events can have the same cause. For example, it may be the case that city residents may have become interested in arts and due to the high cost of museum ticket entry, some residents decided to experience art through television programs and the others through museum visits. Clearly, interest in art triggered both television program attendance and museum arts visits. Moreover, behind the author assertion there is an unstated assumption that reduction of funding for television art program will have a negative impact on the number of city museums visitors. In reality, it could be that after a certain number of television visual art programs has been released, the subsequent have no impact on the viewers and are therefore unnecessary. In that case adding or reducing funding will not impact the number city art museum visitor. To end, the author argument has no legs to stand on because if the total population of the country has decreased over the last five year while both the number of residents watching visual art program and the number of residents visiting the art museum remain unchanged, there is no surprise to see the increase of both the rate of resident watching art program and the rate of visitors to museum. Yet the author has not ruled out this eventuality.
Second the argument conclusion that fund dedicated to city art should be allocated to public television is fallacious. On the one hand, by assigning the funds dedicated to art to public television, one cannot guarantee that those will be used to finance art programs. On the other hand, even if some of those funds will be used for visual art program, there is no guarantee that these programs would have a greater impact than other non-television programs used to promote art, such as schools and homes campaigns to sensitize population about importance of art or subsidy for museums entry tickets
In summary, because the argument leaves out several key issues, it is neither sound nor persuasive, and therefore unconvincing. It would have been more thorough or convincing if the author closed the gap discussed above. In order to assess the merits of a certain situation, it is essential to have a full knowledge of all contributing factors.
